‘’More than 100 guns have been seized by Western Australian police in raids on so-called “sovereign citizens” in an operation sparked by the shooting deaths of two Victorian officers.

Gun owners known for espousing sovereign-citizen ideology were targeted in the five-day operation last week across metropolitan and regional WA.’’

Obviously Sovereign Citizens pose a threat, so having broken no laws their personal property is confiscated because someone who shares their beliefs broke the law.

Looking forward to the confiscation of firearms from all Muslims who are licenced firearm owners.

We can confidently assume that the WA Police will act with unprejudiced even handinesses.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/more-than-100-guns-seized-in-police-raids-on-sovereign-citizens/ar-AA1NQy3X?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W099&cvid=68e19530c99740cfad78b49c4f3ad3b1&ei=35

Nice work   [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Round up those crazy SovCits and lock 'em up!

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 10:14am:

‘’More than 100 guns have been seized by Western Australian police in raids on so-called “sovereign citizens” in an operation sparked by the shooting deaths of two Victorian officers. Gun owners known for espousing sovereign-citizen ideology were targeted in the five-day operation last week across metropolitan and regional WA.’’ Obviously Sovereign Citizens pose a threat, so having broken no laws their personal property is confiscated because someone who shares their beliefs broke the law. Looking forward to the confiscation of firearms from all Muslims who are licenced firearm owners. We can confidently assume that the WA Police will act with unprejudiced even handinesses. https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/more-than-100-guns-seized-in-police-raids-on-sovereign-citizens/ar-AA1NQy3X?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W099&cvid=68e19530c99740cfad78b49c4f3ad3b1&ei=35

But a sovereign citizen would not have a license for a firearm because that would then make them law abiding and not sovereign.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 10:17am:

Round up those crazy SovCits and lock 'em up!

Poor gweggy. Dissent is still allowed. ;)

But Leroy makes a good point. How can they be SovCit's when they have firearm licences? ::)

I guess it is because they are pseudo SovCit's, and they must be punished as well.

This democratic piece of law covers it all,
from WA firearms law.
https://www.australianhunting.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=292445.0;attach=282511;image
Police State?

‘’I don’t like your haircut, your licence is revoked.’’

---

lee wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:00pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 10:17am: Round up those crazy SovCits and lock 'em up! Poor gweggy. Dissent is still allowed. ;) But Leroy makes a good point. How can they be SovCit's when they have firearm licences? ::)

They aren't born SovCits.

Many, if not most of them, start off as normal people with drivers licenses and firearms licenses etc.

But then, one day, they get sucked in by a YouTube video and decide to become SovCits.

A lot of it is gradual too.

There is no rule book for SovCits - they aren't thrown out of the club if they're found to have a fishing license.

They're well known for picking and choosing which laws to obey or respect or feel they're entitled to be covered by.

The bottom line is, this is a good move by the WA police - they have my full support.

SovCits are dangerous, mentally ill people who should not be anywhere near a gun.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:25pm:

SovCits are dangerous, mentally ill people who should not be anywhere near a gun.

So says psych-ward patient gweggy. It must be true that they are all dangerous.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

BTW - What metric did WAPol use to determine SovCit status? Is it written in law or just a case of "we decide"?

lee wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 1:25pm: SovCits are dangerous, mentally ill people who should not be anywhere near a gun. So says psych-ward patient gweggy. It must be true that they are all dangerous.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

So say the partners, parents, children and friends of the many police officers who have been murdered by SovCits.

But you keep on laughing at them, if that's what gets you off, lee.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:35pm:

So say the partners, parents, children and friends of the many police officers who have been murdered by SovCits.

And how many is that? Not only globally but in Australia. Don't be shy.

BTW - I notice you didn't answer on their methodology.


greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:35pm:

But you keep on laughing at them, if that's what gets you off, lee.

No petal. I keep laughing at you, you jsut don't want to accept that you are laughable. ;)

I will give you a clue -

"Rare police shooting reveals how a US imported belief system is becoming more violent in Australia"

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/29/australia/australian-sovereign-citizens-manhunt-intl-hnk

Rare? oh dear.

I have assisted disabled target shooters in mainline sporting events.
All of them could have their licences revoked under WA’s dictator laws.
Among those I’ve had the honour to assist was a chap who was almost completely paralysed except for his head.
He would look through the sights and indicate which way he wanted the rifle moved, when he was satisfied with the aim, one of us would put the trigger string in his mouth and he’d fire the shot.

I like to think that he enjoyed himself.

Perhaps the WA Police Commissioner would think he was a danger and should not have a liicence.

Sickening, the amount of people here who support SovCits who murder police officers   :-/

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 2:46pm:

Sickening, the amount of people here who support SovCits who murder police officers   :-/

No one here has done that -

withdraw it with a sincere apology.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 2:46pm:

Sickening, the amount of people here who support SovCits who murder police officers   :-/

More sickening is the people who won't quantify the "many". ::)

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 10:14am:

‘’More than 100 guns have been seized by Western Australian police in raids on so-called “sovereign citizens” in an operation sparked by the shooting deaths of two Victorian officers. Gun owners known for espousing sovereign-citizen ideology were targeted in the five-day operation last week across metropolitan and regional WA.’’

Do a WWW >> image search << for...
"GLOCK MODEL 22"


GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W

This particular semi-auto pistol is the firearm which [i believe] all Australian Police 'FORCES' [general duty officers] are issued with, Australia-wide.



ARGUMENT;
Some years ago, the Australian Government [federal parliament] decided to introduce, Australia wide FIREARM LAWS,
which make >> THE POSSESSION << of this type of firearm, in Australia, a criminal offence.


Those FIREARM LAWS [regarding 'prohibited' firearms],
[should] apply TO ALL AUSTRALIAN CITIZENS.

Q.
Shouldn't they ???



Yet..... all over Australia, any Australian citizen, walking in 'public spaces',
can witness [local, state] police officers,
carrying this type of PROHIBITED firearm [the GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W],
OPENLY, IN PUBLIC AREAS.


COUNTER ARGUMENT;
'Qualifying police officers,
get an exemption from such 'universal' firearm laws,
because of the nature and danger, of their work.'

QUESTION;
WHY SHOULD THEY ?

QUESTION;
WHY DO GOVERNMENTS.....VALUE THE LIFE OF A SERVANT OF THE POLITICAL STATE,
OVER, THE VALUE OF THE LIFE OF ANY LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN ?


Why.....should a person......
JUST BECAUSE HE/SHE >> IS A SERVANT << OF THE GOVERNMENT,
be entitled to MORE LIBERTY AND MORE FREEDOM, AND MORE RIGHTS,
than all of his/her fellow LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ?
........SIMPLY BECAUSE....HE/SHE IS A SERVANT OF [not the people, but] THE POLITICAL STATE.


ARGUMENT;
I am an Australian citizen [i am an old man],
and i have never been charged or convicted of any criminal offence.
No illicit drug infringements - ever.
No drunk driving charges or convictions - ever.

Decades and decades, with a 'clean sheet'.

And yet, i would not be 'permitted' to purchase and own a firearm,
such as the GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W.



IN COMPARISON.....
TO MY OWN LACK OF CRIMINAL INCLINATIONS.......
I have seen many reports in the mainstream media over the years......
detailing, >> the actions << of 'serving' police officers,
[persons who were daily, >> IN POSSESSION << of a 'prohibited firearm',
the GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W]....


I RECOUNT, WHAT MEDIA HISTORY HAS RECORDED...
some, serving police officers have murdered their own spouse [with their service pistol, in W.A.],
some/many, serving police officers have been charged and convicted of child molestation,
some/many, serving police officers have been charged and convicted of aggravated RAPE,
some/many, serving police officers have been charged and convicted of TRAFFICKING IN LARGE AMOUNTS OF ILLICIT DRUGS!!,

One serving police officer [in W.A.] was charged and convicted of being under the influence of 'METH' [i.e. HE WAS A METH ADDICT !!!],
and while he was on duty, and while he was under the influence of 'METH',
he decided to discharge his GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W service pistol,
in a W.A. suburban street, in order to 'destroy' a savage dog!!

FURTHER......
And we are all aware of the recent notorious double murder in NSW,
a double murder [ALLEGEDLY] carried out, by a member of the LBGTQRXYZ community,
who was also a 'serving' NSW police officer,
who was in POSSESSION of >> his GOVERNMENT ISSUED << ......GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W.

AND HE [ALLEGEDLY] MURDERED, TWO MEN IN NSW.



ARGUMENT;
All police officers are members of our Australian community.

And yet, becoming a serving police officer,
DOES NOT imbue an individual, with an inability to commit a crime,
even a violent crime.

imbue = = fill with a feeling or quality.

And yet, ......our governments, feel that it is OK to issue police officers [fellow members of our community],
with PROHIBITED [in law] FIREARMS.



ARGUMENT;
Why shouldn't Australian police officers be subject to the exact, same,
common laws of Australia,
that persons like myself and others......are compelled to be subject to ?

Why should Australian police officers NOT be subject to the same, common laws of Australia,
as other Australian citizens are subject to ???


ARGUMENT;
Firearms are DANGEROUS.

And firearms are DANGEROUS, in the hands of the wrong [i.e. irresponsible] persons.

AND YET..... our governments feel, that it is OK >> FOR THEM <<
to issue dangerous weapons, to 'qualifying' members,
of 'a service',
WHICH ANSWERS [serves] DIRECTLY.......TO GOVERNMENT DIRECTION.

....a circumstance, which to my mind,
is STUPID, >> AND POLITICALLY CORRUPT <<, AND INAPPROPRIATE.

Yadda wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 10:01pm:

FURTHER...... And we are all aware of the recent notorious double murder in NSW, a double murder [ALLEGEDLY] carried out, by a member of the LBGTQRXYZ community, who was also a 'serving' NSW police officer, who was in POSSESSION of >> his GOVERNMENT ISSUED << ......GLOCK MODEL 22 .40 S&W. AND HE [ALLEGEDLY] MURDERED, TWO MEN IN NSW.

WWW search....
"ABC" nsw police officer Beau Lamarre-Condon, allegedly, shoots dead, two men


It is alleged, that Beau Lamarre-Condon had been 'in a relationship' with one of the deceased men,
Jesse Baird.



Quote:

Beau Lamarre-Condon pleads not guilty to murdering Sydney couple Jesse Baird and Luke Davies By Jamie McKinnell Tue 26 Aug 2025 ......Mr Baird and Mr Davies were allegedly shot with a police-issued handgun in Mr Baird's Paddington home, before their bodies were found the following week in surf bags at Bungonia. ......Mr Lamarre-Condon was arrested before the bodies were found. Police have said Mr Baird previously had a brief relationship with the former officer.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-08-26/beau-lamarre-condon-pleads-not-guilty-over-alleged-double-murder/105697242

[the whole article is just a click away.]


COMMENT;
Whatever selection criteria are being used to sanction the issue of dangerous and PROHIBITED [in law] firearms,
to persons who are also selected to be serving police officers,
that selection criteria MAY INDEED BE 'WOKE' AND 'PC',
but that criteria is patently IN-appropriate.


sanction2 = = official permission or approval for an action.

inappropriate = = not suitable or appropriate.

The question is whether anyone in a position of power should have such discretionary powers as the WA Police Commissioner.

Especially when that person is a political appointee and is not legally accountable for his actions under the law that sanctions them.

IF the firearms laws were so great, shouldn't the psych assessment have been used?

It sounds more like a knee-jerk response.

If you actually look at peoples rights in Australia it is pretty much a police state.

In Australia the police pretty much have the right to identify anyone they like. The US 4th amendment gives protection to people in this regard as is the case in the UK and most of the western world but not Australia. The show me your papers that was synonymous to Germany in the 1930's is today still a alive and well in much of if not all of Australia.

In fact in terms of trespass law not only do the police have the right to identify but trespassing land owners or their proxy also have this right.

I didn't realise we even had Australian sov cits. The American version is based on the rights of the constitution. Some of the points they make also seem to be reasonably supported by the constitution.

In Australia we don't really have these types of rights so I don't see where their argument comes from.

Don't care much either. I know we had that guy who claimed independence and was running his own nation (good luck to him) and the guy who claimed royal linage - good luck to him too.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 6^th, 2025 at 7:36pm:

I didn't realise we even had Australian sov cits. The American version is based on the rights of the constitution. Some of the points they make also seem to be reasonably supported by the constitution. In Australia we don't really have these types of rights so I don't see where their argument comes from.

The Australian ones are even stupider than the American ones.

The Aussie SovCits often cite US laws when they're confronted by the police.

These people are as stupid as they are dangerous.

They are genuinely insane - I can't stress that enough.

I'm not being hyperbolic - they have serious mental health issues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lly7Ei_ujo

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 6^th, 2025 at 7:52pm:

The Australian ones are even stupider than the American ones. The Aussie SovCits often cite US laws when they're confronted by the police. These people are as stupid as they are dangerous. They are genuinely insane - I can't stress that enough. I'm not being hyperbolic - they have serious mental health issues. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lly7Ei_ujo

;D ;D ;D

I really shouldn't laugh because there is definitely something seriously wrong with these so called "Sovereign Citizens".

A couple of comments from the video:


Quote:

@TheBrubaker2 1 year ago Hats off to the female officer for resisting the urge to laugh during this stop.

I was waiting for her to burst out laughing, she was laughing a bit when she walked around in front of the car the first time.


Quote:

@sheila-bk8ds 11 months ago I think that's why she kept turning her head.😅

Yep, I thought that too.. lol..

And:


Quote:

@notsparks 1 year ago I'm a lawyer in the US. These arguments won't even work here.

;D Still doesn't stop them trying.

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:04pm:

This democratic piece of law covers it all, from WA firearms law. https://www.australianhunting.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=292445.0;attach=282511;image Police State? ‘’I don’t like your haircut, your licence is revoked.’’

Heinrich Himmler comes to mind.

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:25pm:

lee wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 1:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 10:17am: Round up those crazy SovCits and lock 'em up! Poor gweggy. Dissent is still allowed. ;) But Leroy makes a good point. How can they be SovCit's when they have firearm licences? ::) They aren't born SovCits. Many, if not most of them, start off as normal people with drivers licenses and firearms licenses etc. But then, one day, they get sucked in by a YouTube video and decide to become SovCits. A lot of it is gradual too. There is no rule book for SovCits - they aren't thrown out of the club if they're found to have a fishing license. They're well known for picking and choosing which laws to obey or respect or feel they're entitled to be covered by. The bottom line is, this is a good move by the WA police - they have my full support. SovCits are dangerous, mentally ill people who should not be anywhere near a gun.

Is that how it happened to you, gradually then suddenly?

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:25pm:

lee wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 1:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 10:17am: Round up those crazy SovCits and lock 'em up! Poor gweggy. Dissent is still allowed. ;) But Leroy makes a good point. How can they be SovCit's when they have firearm licences? ::) They aren't born SovCits. Many, if not most of them, start off as normal people with drivers licenses and firearms licenses etc. But then, one day, they get sucked in by a YouTube video and decide to become SovCits. A lot of it is gradual too. There is no rule book for SovCits - they aren't thrown out of the club if they're found to have a fishing license. They're well known for picking and choosing which laws to obey or respect or feel they're entitled to be covered by. The bottom line is, this is a good move by the WA police - they have my full support. SovCits are dangerous, mentally ill people who should not be anywhere near a gun.

Is that how it happened to you, gradually then suddenly?

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5^th, 2025 at 1:25pm:

lee wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 1:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 5th, 2025 at 10:17am: Round up those crazy SovCits and lock 'em up! Poor gweggy. Dissent is still allowed. ;) But Leroy makes a good point. How can they be SovCit's when they have firearm licences? ::) They aren't born SovCits. Many, if not most of them, start off as normal people with drivers licenses and firearms licenses etc. But then, one day, they get sucked in by a YouTube video and decide to become SovCits. A lot of it is gradual too. There is no rule book for SovCits - they aren't thrown out of the club if they're found to have a fishing license. They're well known for picking and choosing which laws to obey or respect or feel they're entitled to be covered by. The bottom line is, this is a good move by the WA police - they have my full support. SovCits are dangerous, mentally ill people who should not be anywhere near a gun.

Should they be anywhere near a car?
Anywhere near a chainsaw?
Anywhere near a knife?

The WA police raided the homes of 70 so-called 'sovereign citizens'...not because they all identified as such, but because they made social media posts critical of the government....But note, these weapons were seized and licenses cancelled, but no criminal charges relating to unlicenced or illegally modified forearms, no charges for resisting, obstructing or assaulting police....only 7 people charged for allegedly storing their firearms incorrectly. These people have done nothing wrong, the government has punished them for 'wrongthink'    ::)

Dare we think that by the criteria expressed by the police minister in justifying this action, the Muslim community can expect similar raids?

https://youtu.be/rXGTCq9ik6A

Belgarion wrote on Oct 9^th, 2025 at 7:07pm:

The WA police raided the homes of 70 so-called 'sovereign citizens'...

Yes.

Job well done   [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

greggerypeccary wrote on Oct 9^th, 2025 at 8:12pm:

Job well done

So tell us about the psych evaluation that said they were mentally ill. ::)